The binary tarball on RHEL 6-like OS depends on OpenSSL 0.9.8e being installed, available in openssl098e package, which is side-by-side installable with openssl 1.0.

We do have 0.9.8e installed, so we're covered for that. But in case the version of SSL changes, or in case we decide to use another SSL distro etc., should we use the Percona tarball that has SSL included? Currently we do not use SSL in MySQL but we might in the future, so I want to be sure we're covered.

SQLGuy: It is a question of practicality vs. security vs. maintainability. If it works for you without SSL statically compiled, use that. The only reason it was created a separate download with SSL integrated is because for some distros it's difficult or you cannot install that version of SSL. But if you can decide, it is better to depend on a non-static build, that supposedly you may update more frequently that your PS build in case of a security problem (because you regularly update your OS, don't you?). In terms of functionality, both should provide the same.

Comment

Generally, you should install with static openssl because without it might fail complaining about libssl.so.6 is missing. If library is not installed which often in ubuntu then start of PS fails. That is the reason libssl is compiled in Percona Server